Alberta Transport Banning RHD - Take the survey

[403civic]

did a search, didn't find this posted yet.

The RHD is one of the last questions on the Survey, but the entire thing only took me like 5mins to do

https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/BN2TLYF

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-A19D5Ip7yVA/VH_a_pOZsDI/AAAAAAAACmY/6ePiXUZ8k3I/w877-h812-no/RHD_Survey.jpg

[Graham_A_M]

Wow. I'll have to vote no when on a PC later today... so RHD vehicles should warrant higher insurance premiums as a result, but not be banned almost entirely. The US has the 25 year rule, hopefully it doesn't pass into Canada as well. That would reallt suck for a LOT of current JDM owners

[killramos]

I wonder how many people think its ridiculous to ban/restrict RHD vehicles but want to ban/restrict guns based on arbitrary features.

:angel:

Sounds pretty stupid... Make them pay through the nose for insurance if they are so dangerous but i don't see why they should be banned... And throw the book at them when they crash for being idiots...

Cars don't cause crashes, people do! :rofl:

I cant help but draw all the similarities to these two issues...

[E46..sTyLez]

I am so glad this is happening, it is about time. I am voting for the antique rule...because I personally hate RHD cars. I used to marvel at the sight of a last gen Supra, now it is RHD 90% of the time and I just shake my head. In fact, the only reason I'm voting for the antique rule is because I would still like to see some R34 GTR's at shows and the track etc.

[Tik-Tok]

Anyone else find it weird "Alberta Transportation" is using surveymonkey, and there's not a single link or mention about it on their website?

[killramos]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
Anyone else find it weird "Alberta Transportation" is using surveymonkey, and there's not a single link or mention about it on their website?

Yes :dunno:

but then again i would implore them to use a free tool rather than pay a few 6 figure union workers to design their own system over 2 years...

If its fake then someone is going to feel the business end of the long dick of the law for impersonating the government haha...

[schocker]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
Anyone else find it weird "Alberta Transportation" is using surveymonkey, and there's not a single link or mention about it on their website?
I had followed a link originally from cfcn or cbc on their website from a story on how to make roads safer. I voted antique rule though...

[Sentry]

Unfortunately I think the survey results will be vastly in favour of banning them, given that 99.9% of people don't have any interest in RHD cars being on the road.

Fortunately I think Alberta Transport will disregard the survey results in favour of keeping the status quo. I mean if they do ban them, what are their options? Grandfather in all the current cars and then there's still a shitload of RHD cars out on the roads or pay out all the owners at very large taxpayer expense?

[killramos]

Originally posted by Sentry
I mean if they do ban them, what are their options? Grandfather in all the current cars and then there's still a shitload of RHD cars out on the roads or pay out all the owners at very large taxpayer expense?

They can do whatever they want. They wont pay the owners. They will just fine them if they are every caught on a public street.

Nothing illegal about have a rhd car in your garage / back yard (private property)...

Unless of course they make owning a rhd car a criminal offense... That is a bit different.

Though they can still legally do what they want.

[ercchry]

i like this survey... #17 is a BIG yes

and #28... do i hate all semis? no... just the asshat ones

[killramos]

Originally posted by ercchry
i like this survey... #17 is a BIG yes

Yea it is a good survey actually. I wish it had questions about GDL...

[Sentry]

If that were the case I'd strip anything of value from my Aristo and leave the husk on Alberta Transport's front lawn.

I don't know how that got there, and it's not mine. It's just a worthless unregisterable hunk of metal. :dunno:

[Rocket1k78]

I wonder how much of the 32-40% crash rate is due to the driver driving like an ass. I'm not sure if its just me but every time i see a RHD its being driven my a young white male.

[Kloubek]

Originally posted by Rocket1k78
I wonder how much of the 32-40% crash rate is due to the driver driving like an ass. I'm not sure if its just me but every time i see a RHD its being driven my a young white male.

Usually true.

I would support no longer bringing them in, but I think it would be unfair to current owners to severely restrict them. Perhaps grandfather the ones already in the country, and let them die off from age.

[xnvy]

^Probably quite a bit has to do with younger people being able to get their hand on cheap, relatively powerful, turbo cars from Japan. A turbo Supra from Japan is much cheaper than it's NA equivalent so younger people are more likely to get it. The trifecta of RHD, young driver, and power is bound to result in more accidents than in everyone got an aging Tercel as their first car.

[Sentry]

That's another issue for sure. Go to any highschool parking lot and you're bound to see a Silvia or 180sx or Skyline, all with RWD and upwards of 200-300hp depending on model.

My first TWO cars were a Geo Metro and a Pontiac Firefly with like 50hp. Started from the bottom now we're here. :poosie:

Fastest car in my highschool lot was a mostly stock 5.0L foxbody.

[Mitsu3000gt]

I voted to no longer allow them to be registered. I wouldn't support taking any existing ones away though, just let them run their course.

[962 kid]

Originally posted by E46..sTyLez
I am so glad this is happening, it is about time. I am voting for the antique rule...because I personally hate RHD cars. I used to marvel at the sight of a last gen Supra, now it is RHD 90% of the time and I just shake my head. In fact, the only reason I'm voting for the antique rule is because I would still like to see some R34 GTR's at shows and the track etc.

Are you serious?

[Masked Bandit]

I'm a bit conflicted here. On one hand, I have no use or love for anything RHD. But by the same token, the douche kid driving like an asshat is going to drive like that no matter what he's in. He's going to crash his mommy's mini-van just the same so why ban the car? Haters gonna hate, douchey kid's gonna douche.

[snowcat]

They are simply not designed for our road system. I voted restrict.

[Cos]

.

[a social dsease]

Who cares? If you don't like RHD cars don't buy one. We already have enough rules/regulations in our world. I'm in favour of having very minimal restrictions imposed by the government and letting the "invisible hand" (in this case insurance rates) sort things out.

[Tik-Tok]

WTF is up with questions 19&20 though (I think those were the two)

Buying a pass to be allowed to drive in a HOV lane, with only one person in the car? :facepalm: Kind of defeats the entire purpose.

[M.alex]

What about center-seated cars? :angel:

[Cos]

.

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by Cos


Yeah I know I voted a bunch of no's in that section. HOV, Bus Lanes, etc all seem like a crock of shit to me. If I could car pool I would anyways, if I can't why should there be 1 less lane for me to drive in. Stupid.

True, but it's pretty awesome when two of you are driving to the Horseshoe bay ferry through Vancouver, get to drive right by an hours worth of traffic. :D

[GTS4tw]

I love my RHD, so much safer to drive than all my LHD vehicles. Lots of head on crashes in this neck of the woods, plus way easier to get out on the curb side. Also 99% of our left hand turns are controlled because everyone here is a retard. What is the danger again?

[Rocket1k78]

Originally posted by xnvy
^Probably quite a bit has to do with younger people being able to get their hand on cheap, relatively powerful, turbo cars from Japan. A turbo Supra from Japan is much cheaper than it's NA equivalent so younger people are more likely to get it. The trifecta of RHD, young driver, and power is bound to result in more accidents than in everyone got an aging Tercel as their first car.


Very good point and this has to be a huge factor in the increase in accidents of the RHD cars.

[403civic]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
WTF is up with questions 19&20 though (I think those were the two)

Buying a pass to be allowed to drive in a HOV lane, with only one person in the car? :facepalm: Kind of defeats the entire purpose.

I've seen this in LA
There is a lane you drive in that has a sensor in it, and it takes your picture if you don't have a pass

Traffic moves about 10-30MPH faster in that lane

this lane would be so nice on Deerfoot trail from 7:00am-10:00am
and 4:00pm-7:00pm

[firebane]

Restrict. I've seen far to many close calls with people in RHD vehicles.

[blitz]

Originally posted by GTS4tw
I love my RHD, so much safer to drive than all my LHD vehicles. Lots of head on crashes in this neck of the woods, plus way easier to get out on the curb side. Also 99% of our left hand turns are controlled because everyone here is a retard. What is the danger again?

The danger is to the people you hit head on who are driving LHD vehicles.

[GTS4tw]

Originally posted by blitz


The danger is to the people you hit head on who are driving LHD vehicles.

Why would they be in my lane?

[sr20s14zenki]

I think somebody mentioned at one time (i forget, was long ago...) that BC insurance, fudged the study to swing results in their favour. This debate has been on for 10 years or more, and nothing has ever come of it.

If i remember correctly, didn't Quebec put a summer long ban on RHD cars about 3 or 4 years ago?

[slinkie]

I hope they never do, why should a few kids in ratty cars ruin it for everyone else? If they ban RHD, there will still be kids in ratty cars, they will just move to mustangs or something

Also some of the JDM owners I know are the most boring/safe drivers ever

[AE92_TreunoSC]

Most RHD drivers are retarded kids. It's a shame because there are quite a few enthusiasts buying RHD cars and driving responsibly. But I have an overwhelming negative opinion against them.

I wish this survey included HID assholes, I didnt even get a spot for comments.

[16hypen3sp]

VERY surprised this hasn't been done sooner. I was waiting for the day of restriction.

Definitely some problems with them but I don't think total restriction is necessary.

[jacky4566]

Agree with Cos. Licensing needs to be tougher. Too many old ladies and soccer moms think they own the road.

Far as the RHD. I think the states is just jealous we are getting R34's :P

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by AE92_TreunoSC
.

I wish this survey included HID assholes, I didnt even get a spot for comments.

Under the section for demerits, I wrote "Demerits for purposefully modifying a vehicle making it unsafe for other drivers, i.e. lifted trucks who's bumpers will not contact other vehicles bumpers, and modified headlights that blind oncoming traffic"

they're both already illegal, but demerits would help prevent a few, rather than just a fine.

[Sugarphreak]

...

[soloracer]

WTF is this saying? Are they trying to confuse people to reach a predetermined conclusion? Are they asking if you must have a licence before taking training? Or maybe if the school should be licenced?

Here is the survey question:

10. Should Alberta Transportation require a licence for driver training course that will not result in a government certificate of course completion?

Yes, Alberta Transportation should licence training whether or not it results in a government certificate.

No, Alberta Transportation should not licence training so long as it does not result in a government certificate.

I don't know

[Anomaly]

Originally posted by a social dsease
Who cares? If you don't like RHD cars don't buy one. We already have enough rules/regulations in our world. I'm in favour of having very minimal restrictions imposed by the government and letting the "invisible hand" (in this case insurance rates) sort things out.
I agree. If they were as statistically bad as everyone seems to indicate they are, companies wouldn't insure them or insurance would be priced out of range for new drivers.
Because more government regulation is always the answer! :rolleyes:

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by soloracer

10. Should Alberta Transportation require a licence for driver training course that will not result in a government certificate of course completion?

Yes, Alberta Transportation should licence training whether or not it results in a government certificate.

No, Alberta Transportation should not licence training so long as it does not result in a government certificate.

I don't know

Other: I read this five times and still don't know what you're asking.

[soloracer]

Just finished and I find the questions regarding toll roads/restricted lanes to be asinine. Just from how the questions are framed you can tell they are trying to get restricted lanes and toll highways approved. I put 0 for the amount I am willing to pay for a one way trip on the highway. I stated motorists already pay enough taxes - fuel, tire, registration and otherwise. If you expect me to pay to use a highway it had better be in pristine condition and have no speed limit. Maybe then I would consider it. But instead they want to charge people to use sections of shitty roads we already have - like deerfoot for example - as a way to tax drivers even more. I drove in France and Italy on my honeymoon and a 3 hr trip each way on their highways set me back 50 Euro in tolls alone.

[soloracer]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


Other: I read this five times and still don't know what you're asking.

That was the question they asked in the survey - not my question. My question was what the hell are they talking about?

[soloracer]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok
WTF is up with questions 19&20 though (I think those were the two)

Buying a pass to be allowed to drive in a HOV lane, with only one person in the car? :facepalm: Kind of defeats the entire purpose.

Not if the real purpose is to find another way to tax your citizens.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by Rocket1k78
I wonder how much of the 32-40% crash rate is due to the driver driving like an ass. I'm not sure if its just me but every time i see a RHD its being driven my a young white male.

Doesn't take a RHD, saw a dumb ass ghetto Genesis coupe tapped an brand new X5 on 11th ave today. Going too fast for weather and dodging in and out of traffic.

Hope his insurance sky rockets.

[Cos]

.

[Aerobat]

Why are any of you saying to ban RHD vehicles?Your going to let the government start telling people what you can and cant drive? What if they decide YOUR daily driver is unsafe on the road?Canada post has had many RHD vehicles for years and im sure they have a very low accident rate because ITS WHO DRIVES THEM.. Many countries in the world operate with both RHD and LHD vehicle driving on the same road and have for years..

Ive owned 9 RHD vehicles and have never been in any accident with any of them because i dont drive it stupidly..if its all about safety should the government just only let us buy 30hp volvos that top out at 80?

If your going to raise insurance on them shouldnt this be on any vehicle relative to power/top speed? fair is fair..

How about tighter standards for drivers and harsher punishments for these RHD douches..you see some one driving like an idiot, call someone!

Motorcycles dont have seatbelts and crotch rockets can easily exceed 200KMPH, should we ban those too? Once you let the government start making decisions for you people are bound to lose.

[AE92_TreunoSC]

^ If they are a danger to the public the government will intervene. If they can increase road safety by angering a few JDM fans then so be it. There are stats to prove it and I believe them.

It's 2014, people aren't responsible for their own actions, government and corporations are.

If someone is killed by a orange RHD 4 door skyline tomorrow on a single lane highway, they will blame the transportation board for allowing the stupid thing to be on the road in the first place.

Also most JDM cars have lower standards for safety, including rollover, side impact, front and rear enforcements etc. Most have wrong headlights installed and have further safety measures removed like air bags or the factory seats.


Witch hunt! BAN RHD!!! and :winter:

The post van argument is petty and worthless, most of them are programed now-a-days to never make a left turn for efficiency and safety.

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by soloracer


Not if the real purpose is to find another way to tax your citizens.

I say yes and I said would pay $1M/month for it. :rofl:

[Aerobat]

Originally posted by AE92_TreunoSC
If someone is killed by a orange RHD 4 door skyline tomorrow on a single lane highway, they will blame the transportation board for allowing the stupid thing to be on the road in the first place.

Also most JDM cars have lower standards for safety, including rollover, side impact, front and rear enforcements etc. Most have wrong headlights installed and have further safety measures removed like air bags or the factory seats.


If they can directly prove the the vehicle itself was a major contributing factor to the accident then yes, its something to consider...They may have lower standards but its a 15 year old "sports car".. Can you say with certainty that a JDM miata or mr2 is actually less safe than a USDM vehicle? Sure some are missing front rebars but this is to satisfy Canadian bumper laws.. Every wonder why the EVO 8,9's werent allowed to cross the border, not because they were death traps, but because they couldnt satisfy insurance requirements for repairability..

So no more aftermarket seats or steering wheels regardless of what sides the steering wheel on in the name of safety..infact no modifications! only then will our roads be safe!

[killramos]

Originally posted by AE92_TreunoSC
^ If they are a danger to the public the government will intervene. If they can increase road safety by angering a few JDM fans then so be it. There are stats to prove it and I believe them.

It's 2014, people aren't responsible for their own actions, government and corporations are.

If someone is killed by a orange RHD 4 door skyline tomorrow on a single lane highway, they will blame the transportation board for allowing the stupid thing to be on the road in the first place.

Also most JDM cars have lower standards for safety, including rollover, side impact, front and rear enforcements etc. Most have wrong headlights installed and have further safety measures removed like air bags or the factory seats.


Witch hunt! BAN RHD!!! and :winter:

The post van argument is petty and worthless, most of them are programed now-a-days to never make a left turn for efficiency and safety.

Think of the children :rolleyes:

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by soloracer
WTF is this saying? Are they trying to confuse people to reach a predetermined conclusion? Are they asking if you must have a licence before taking training? Or maybe if the school should be licenced?

Here is the survey question:

10. Should Alberta Transportation require a licence for driver training course that will not result in a government certificate of course completion?

Yes, Alberta Transportation should licence training whether or not it results in a government certificate.

No, Alberta Transportation should not licence training so long as it does not result in a government certificate.

I don't know

I'm pretty sure that one is about licensing where passing the course means getting some kind of permit but not one that is issued by the government. The question is whether the Alberta government should require the person issuing the permit to be formally licensed to do so, rather than just have the trainer/licenser just be an in-house approved person as it currently stands.

[CapnCrunch]

Originally posted by soloracer
Just finished and I find the questions regarding toll roads/restricted lanes to be asinine. Just from how the questions are framed you can tell they are trying to get restricted lanes and toll highways approved. I put 0 for the amount I am willing to pay for a one way trip on the highway. I stated motorists already pay enough taxes - fuel, tire, registration and otherwise. If you expect me to pay to use a highway it had better be in pristine condition and have no speed limit. Maybe then I would consider it. But instead they want to charge people to use sections of shitty roads we already have - like deerfoot for example - as a way to tax drivers even more. I drove in France and Italy on my honeymoon and a 3 hr trip each way on their highways set me back 50 Euro in tolls alone.

None of that stuff makes any sense on the highways. The only thing that was even close was being able to restrict commercial vehicles to a dedicated lane. And even that seems dumb considering we only have a handful of multi-lane highways in the entire province.

How the fuck would you have a carpool lane on the QE2? Priuses on the left, and the other 50,000 people stuck in the right lane with semis and grandparents?

[killramos]

Honestly though do people really think albertas HIGHWAYS are congested?

HOV or bus only lanes are ridiculous here. I figure the only place they are considering this is deerfoot...

A better plan would be stricter penalties for those using the leftmost lane and not actively passing...

I was supportive of restricting commercial trucks from using the leftmost lane though :dunno:

Some of the most dangerous situations I have experienced on our highways is when there is a dick measuring contest between 2 B train drivers, one of whom is driving a whole 3 km/hr faster than the other and takes 15 minutes to complete a pass...

[Ca_Silvia13]

I've heard from two different people that are involved with licensing and importing that AB is looking to ban RHD cars around March of 2015. This survey is a littel too coincedental. This may not be a flat out ban but requirements for the cars to pass an OOP inspection would essentially make them never be legal here.

That being said my RHD cars are in better/safer condition then 90% of the cars i see when out driving around.

Its been said before but, RHD cars don't get in to accidents by themselves, the drives are the one who make the decisions. Regardless if its a Range Rover, Sunfire or Silvia.



**edit - cracking down on lifted trucks, RHD cars and modified vehicles? What happened to Beyond? This place used to be cool....

[Cos]

.

[rage2]

Originally posted by CapnCrunch
How the fuck would you have a carpool lane on the QE2? Priuses on the left, and the other 50,000 people stuck in the right lane with semis and grandparents?
That's how it works in Cali. You're essentially rewarded for car pooling. Those non HOV lanes suck ass haha. Priuses and other hybrids used to be rewarded HOV access too, but that perk is gone now.


Originally posted by Ca_Silvia13
That being said my RHD cars are in better/safer condition then 90% of the cars i see when out driving around.
I dunno man, 90% is a bit of a stretch. But I see where you're coming from, RHD cars are typically in very good condition.


Originally posted by Ca_Silvia13
**edit - cracking down on lifted trucks, RHD cars and modified vehicles? What happened to Beyond? This place used to be cool....
Yea, I'm blown away by how many people are for the ban too. I voted no to the ban.

[killramos]

Originally posted by Cos


So you're saying your 1980's vintage RHD car is safer than 90% of all vehicles. I would say 75% of all vehicles I see are newer than 2005 and unmodified. How is your car safer than this? I'm all for people having their opinions on matters but this seems far fetched to me.

:werd:

Every decade crash test safety goes up dramatically. Watch this video.

Then think about how much better things are in 2014 compared to mid 90's

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73zDrVMyWOU

from the 60's into the 80's the driver cell get completely crushed and intruded on... Modern cars. Cell is maintained due to use of crumple zones. Your silvia? Not so much.

[FraserB]

Originally posted by Tik-Tok


Under the section for demerits, I wrote "Demerits for purposefully modifying a vehicle making it unsafe for other drivers, i.e. lifted trucks who's bumpers will not contact other vehicles bumpers, and modified headlights that blind oncoming traffic"

they're both already illegal, but demerits would help prevent a few, rather than just a fine.

Lifting a truck is not illegal in Alberta. Having the bumper higher than another car's bumper isn't illegal either. And considering there are many stock trucks with higher bumpers than a lot of stock cars, they'll never make a law saying bumper heights have to be equal.

Either way, banning something based on looks and opinion is retarded. Crack down on the shitty drivers, new to Canada drivers and the driving "schools" that will let you buy a license.

I'd also be fine with every vehicle having to pass a mechanical fitness inspection every few years. Clear the rust buckets and shitty mods off the street.

[Megatol]

It doesn't matter RHD or LHD. It all depends from the driver: all these stupid kids will move to LHDs and crash anyway. And I don't think high performance JDM cars are cheap, for example R34 GTR will be around $30K landed. Definitely not many could afford it.

If you don't like RHD just don't buy it.

This past weekend with snow we had around 700 collisions only in Calgary (proof link: http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/winter-weather-continues-in-calgary ).
How many of them related with RHD? I'm pretty sure is ZERO.

[A790]

Originally posted by Ca_Silvia13
That being said my RHD cars are in better/safer condition then 90% of the cars i see when out driving around.
No they fucking are not. That's a crock of shit and you know it. The vast majority of vehicles I see on the road are late-model and are substantially safer than 15+ year old RHD imports. Modern stability control, air bags, and other safety mechanisms trump your 15 year old cars, period.

I have nothing against RHD imports, but don't go around spouting obvious bullshit. It doesn't make your position stronger.

[Cos]

.

[Ca_Silvia13]

Originally posted by rage2


I dunno man, 90% is a bit of a stretch. But I see where you're coming from, RHD cars are typically in very good condition.



I work in the NE ;)




Originally posted by Cos


So you're saying your 1980's vintage RHD car is safer than 90% of all vehicles. I would say 75% of all vehicles I see are newer than 2005 and unmodified. How is your car safer than this? I'm all for people having their opinions on matters but this seems far fetched to me.

My vintage 1980's Silvia is just as safe as a 1980's mustang/tercel/civic which are all legal here. Come on man is my Silvia safer then a 2010 Civic, fuck no. Apples to Apples

[Cos]

.

[Rocket1k78]

Originally posted by Cos




However I see RHD Subaru wagons being driven by absolute fuck-tards almost daily that are in a terrible state of disrepair. In Coventry there seems to be a lot of RHD. Will these people still drive and probably still drive like a bunch of assholes? Yes. However they will be driving a car where they can see out of the correct side, and hopefully less power and is in better shape. This won't solve all of the problems but it would not be compounding the problem at least. It seems to me the RHD car has turned into the poor-mans performance car. They shouldn't be driven daily over here.



Exactly! i think a lot of people are not seeing the whole situation here, the big problem with rhd is the fact you can get a a really fast hp car for cheap, you're on the wrong side and i think its safe to say 90% of these owners are younger males. We've all been there before and know what its like to be a young driver and I don't know about you guys but i felt pretty invincible lol

[killramos]

Originally posted by Rocket1k78


Exactly! i think a lot of people are not seeing the whole situation here, the big problem with rhd is the fact you can get a a really fast hp car for cheap, you're on the wrong side and i think its safe to say 90% of these owners are younger males. We've all been there before and know what its like to be a young driver and I don't know about you guys but i felt pretty invincible lol

You can go out and buy an e36 M3 for under 9 grand. Fast car. Cheap. Just like a rhd (probably faster i don't know much about rhd cars performance stock).

You cant ban RHD cars because they are good value, they aren't even exclusively cheap performance is what I am getting at.

You would be better off putting a limit on the power-weight ratio that you can drive until your 25 with that mentality.

Or heck lets just ban everything with more than 200 horsepower.

Licensing and enforcement is the problem. Not the tool.

[Megatol]

Decision should be made on pure facts but not on hypothetical RHD safety issues.

Facts are:
In 2013 in Alberta was 141,638 collisions (http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType47/Production/Glance2013.pdf)

Where are no recent data about RHD collision rate, but I found research was made by Transport Canada and between 2000 and 2004, 25,550 imported vehicles
15 years and older accounted for 80 collisions, this is all around Canada, not only Alberta (https://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/roadsafety/paper_39_lecuyer.pdf)

Let say it was 150 RHD related collisions in 2013 in Alberta (but I'm sure it was less), it is only 0.01%.

Let say after the RHD ban instead of 141,638 collisions it will be 141,488, will it make roads safer?

Better yet government should take on better triver training, winter tires etc and if it will decrease only 10% it will be big win, because 10% is around 15 thousands collisions less.

[Sentry]

Australia's take on this, where RHD vehicles are immensely popular.


From 1 January 2014, a new definition for a high-powered vehicle has been introduced for cars manufactured on or after 1 January 2010. A car manufactured on or after this date is a high-powered vehicle if it has:

•a power-to-weight ratio of more than 130kW/t
•an engine modification that must be approved under section 13 of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management—Vehicle Standards and Safety) Regulation 2010 (PDF, 831KB)( http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/SLS/2010/10SL192.pdf ).
The power-to-weight ratio is calculated by dividing the car’s maximum engine power in kilowatts (kW) by the tare mass and multiplying the result by 1000.

For example, the power-to-weight ratio of a car that has a maximum engine power of 195kW and a tare mass of 1,667kg would be calculated as:

•(195 ÷ 1667) x 1000 = 117kW/t.
The existing definition will continue to apply to cars manufactured before 1 January 2010. Under this definition a car is a high-powered vehicle if it has:

•an engine with 8 or more cylinders
•a turbocharged or supercharged engine that is not diesel powered
•an engine with a power output of more than 210kW
•a rotary engine with an engine capacity of more than 1146cc
•an engine modification that must be approved under section 13 of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management—Vehicle Standards and Safety) Regulation 2010 (PDF, 831KB)( http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/SLS/2010/10SL192.pdf ).


tldr: Restricted power to weight, no turbos, no V8s, less than 300hp.

If you got your P license at 16, you can have a full license by 19.

I think "no turbos and no v8s" is a little much, but restricted power and power-to-weight makes sense.

[ercchry]

just ban soccer moms... cant even count the amount that have been t-boned at dunbow rd and hwy2a... minivans, suvs, etc... no RHD though

[Aleks]

Thanks for the link. I voted for restriction of RHD registrations going forward.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by Sentry

I think "no turbos and no v8s" is a little much, but restricted power and power-to-weight makes sense.

The cutoff for "High-power vehicles" is 130Kw/t. To put that into perspective, by that critera a V6 Toyota Camry is a "high-power vehicle."

[Sentry]

Well it kinda is. 265hp, it's no slouch, regardless of the stigma a Camry badge carries.

What did you drive when you were 16? And how much of a slow POS was it? And despite being a slow POS how many times did you almost crash in it?

[FraserB]

Can the people who want a ban or restriction on RHD please post the facts that they made their decision on? With people who feel that these are good ideas, there must be plenty of evidence showing that these vehicles are unsafe and more dangerous than LHD

Or is it just a desire to get rid of something you feel is unsafe or don't like, without any real evidence?

[schocker]

Originally posted by FraserB
Can the people who want a ban or restriction on RHD please post the facts that they made their decision on? With people who feel that these are good ideas, there must be plenty of evidence showing that these vehicles are unsafe and more dangerous than LHD

Or is it just a desire to get rid of something you feel is unsafe or don't like, without any real evidence?
30-40% more likely to be in an accident sounds like a good fact no?

[ercchry]

Originally posted by schocker

30-40% more likely to be in an accident sounds like a good fact no?

if it was a fact

[Crazyjoker77]

Originally posted by Sentry
Australia's take on this, where RHD vehicles are immensely popular.



tldr: Restricted power to weight, no turbos, no V8s, less than 300hp.

If you got your P license at 16, you can have a full license by 19.

I think "no turbos and no v8s" is a little much, but restricted power and power-to-weight makes sense. [/B]

They drive on the left in australia just like britian they dont allow LHD on their roads at all Its not that RHD is popular is is the standard there...

Also off on a little tangent about australia they are crazy strict on vehicle regulations there. I would like to bring up HID's which seems to be a hot topic here on beyond. In australia you can't have HID unless it also has a auto leveling system and a cleaning system. (nozzle and wiper) even new factory vehicles have to have this. so if were going by their standards now pretty much all our cars would already be deemed unsafe. No longer is retrofitiing projectors doing it right...

I've put on 700,000km on my 3 jdm in the last ~10years of owning them, no tickets or accidents.

[killramos]

Originally posted by schocker

30-40% more likely to be in an accident sounds like a good fact no?

But how does that compare to econobox sedans vs sports cars likelihood increase?

I bet its comparable or not a lot more.

[ercchry]

Originally posted by killramos


But how does that compare to econobox sedans vs sports cars likelihood increase?

I bet its comparable or not a lot more.

that stat is 100% based off driver demographic, RHD or not the majority of RHD owners who are young males just crash more than the rest of the population. insurance rates also reflect this, hence why young males pay more (well, at least before the grid came into play)

[rage2]

Originally posted by ercchry
hence why young males pay more (well, at least before the grid came into play)
Still pissed off about the damn grid. I got fucked over growing up in the pre-grid system and if it stayed, insurance would've priced out teens with fast cars. Adjusted for inflation, I was paying $10k a year on the 944 at age 19 with a clean driving record. You kids have it easy.

/oldmanrant

[Cos]

.

[gogreen]

Originally posted by Ca_Silvia13
My vintage 1980's Silvia is just as safe as a 1980's mustang/tercel/civic which are all legal here.

My fear is that an outright ban RHD cars may set a precedent for banning anything of a similar vintage, just due to the way some of the arguments are being framed.

If you ask a classic car enthusiast if they support banning all cars that don't meet current crash safety or emissions standards, they'll say no as that would essentially be a ban on the old car hobby. RHD may be the low-hanging fruit in this instance.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Originally posted by Sentry
Well it kinda is. 265hp, it's no slouch, regardless of the stigma a Camry badge carries.

What did you drive when you were 16? And how much of a slow POS was it? And despite being a slow POS how many times did you almost crash in it?

265hp is much less than a V6 Mustang, and those usually end up as highschooler's cars after a few years. :dunno: I usually drove a V8 Chevy truck around that age, it wasn't much of a slow POS and I've never been in an accident and never nearly crashed it. Maybe I'm just a boring person.

With that said, I don't necessarily disagree with the intent behind restricting performance cars for new drivers - but the Australian system seems rather arbitrary. I'm also not sure quite how that applies to RHD vehicles, were you suggesting that freshly-licensed drivers be disallowed from driving them? I'd completely agree with that.

[Cos]

.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Y'know that signature of yours is getting pretty tall these days.

It'd be a real shame if something happened to it.

(But seriously I have no idea what that GIF is from but it's hilarious)

[FraserB]

Originally posted by schocker

30-40% more likely to be in an accident sounds like a good fact no?

And the source for this is?

[heavyD]

I voted Yes. Get rid of Japan trash on our roads.

[ExtremeSi]

I voted no to this BS. It's dangerous drivers, not dangerous cars.

[Rocket1k78]

Originally posted by killramos


You can go out and buy an e36 M3 for under 9 grand. Fast car. Cheap. Just like a rhd (probably faster i don't know much about rhd cars performance stock).

You cant ban RHD cars because they are good value, they aren't even exclusively cheap performance is what I am getting at.

You would be better off putting a limit on the power-weight ratio that you can drive until your 25 with that mentality.

Or heck lets just ban everything with more than 200 horsepower.

Licensing and enforcement is the problem. Not the tool.

there def are some cheap/fast lhd cars to be had but there will never be more choices than a rhd when it comes to cheap hp. Its the combination of cheap hp and driving on the wrong side not just high hp.

[xnvy]

Cheap hp + idiot young driver is more of a factor than cheap hp + RHD IMO. Based on that I voted for no changes. The guy crashing his JDM Silvia would have been just been crashing a foxbody or something if RHD was banned.

[16hypen3sp]

Where the hell was the question on allowing motorcycles to split lanes on highways????????????????????????

[finboy]

Half way solution, right hand drive only if you are 25+ :rofl:

[tomt64]

While we are here we may as well ban sport bikes too, everyone who owns one rides in a highly unsafe manner.

[HiTempguy1]

Originally posted by FraserB
Can the people who want a ban or restriction on RHD please post the facts that they made their decision on? With people who feel that these are good ideas, there must be plenty of evidence showing that these vehicles are unsafe and more dangerous than LHD

Or is it just a desire to get rid of something you feel is unsafe or don't like, without any real evidence?

Thank you. This thread is full of soccer moms lol. WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN BEING KILLED BY RHD CARS???!!!!! :banghead:


Originally posted by tomt64
While we are here we may as well ban sport bikes too, everyone who owns one rides in a highly unsafe manner.

Exactly.

[E46..sTyLez]

I have no issue with the idea of imported cars and their quality etc. If they were all LHD I'd be all for it, but they are not...they are RHD and we drive on the right side of the road. It is just silly, period.

[Cos]

.

[blubs]

I agree with most of what is being said here. I can see tightening up rules and making RHD's should not be used as daily drivers... But to bundle me in with the group and stop me from taking my mini truck going out to McLean? - I'll be doing good if I can hit 110 downhill with a tailwind. Cant see this as hurting anyone.

[Sentry]

Originally posted by Crazyjoker77
They drive on the left in australia just like britian they dont allow LHD on their roads at all Its not that RHD is popular is is the standard there...
Posted the Australias stuff because them being "cheap performance cars in the hands of inexperienced kids". There's a lot more JDMs running around in Aus than here, and that's what they've done to curb the problem.


Originally posted by BerserkerCatSplat
With that said, I don't necessarily disagree with the intent behind restricting performance cars for new drivers - but the Australian system seems rather arbitrary. I'm also not sure quite how that applies to RHD vehicles, were you suggesting that freshly-licensed drivers be disallowed from driving them? I'd completely agree with that.
The australian system is redundant in its restrictions, you don't need to ban this and that and the other thing, just have a cap on power to weight ratio for new drivers. And probably 2 years instead of 3 would be adequate.

[Ca_Silvia13]

Originally posted by E46..sTyLez
I have no issue with the idea of imported cars and their quality etc. If they were all LHD I'd be all for it, but they are not...they are RHD and we drive on the right side of the road. It is just silly, period.

You know there is a lot of European countries that LHD and RHD vehicles share the roads. There is no outright ban for vehicles in those countries why would Canada, with falsified statistics, jump on the "ban" wagon?

[Tik-Tok]

Originally posted by Ca_Silvia13


You know there is a lot of European countries that LHD and RHD vehicles share the roads. There is no outright ban for vehicles in those countries why would Canada, with falsified statistics, jump on the "ban" wagon?

A lot of European countries also have far better driver training, and licensing.